sr36
TheBrownDog
Hawkins, Lynch, Daniher, Riewoldt all went through that shoddy u18 tall destroying comp - pretty much all the good KPFs except Buddy and Kennedy.Jeremy Cameron goes alright too.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Hawkins, Lynch, Daniher, Riewoldt all went through that shoddy u18 tall destroying comp - pretty much all the good KPFs except Buddy and Kennedy.Jeremy Cameron goes alright too.
Er, no he wasn’t. He had more hitouts than both combined. Marshall probably had the better of him around the ground, but it wasn’t even close to a flogging. I’m not sure how Hayes is even relevant in a Grundy comparison given he wasn’t his direct opponent for 99% of the game…
They weren't going to give someone 6 months, because what's the point. So adding another pick would have cost a pick or recruit at the end of the year. It's why most clubs either passed a pick or didn't bother to open up a second pick even though they could have.I remember a story saying we looked at Hayes, prob gave him the Apex36 recruitment strategy, don’t bother giving him a shot, better off selecting no one.
Kid can casually roost them from 50 and also happens to be able to take a leap then crumb/goal off his own pack... A bit to work with there, even though highlights packages make everyone looks good.
we didn't stuff it, Carmicheal will be intrenched in the 22 after the byeCarmichael looks great, Twomey said we did the best of any club, and there's 80 pages of people saying we stuffed it? Classic BigFooty.
Wilkie took 12 marks for the Saints this week, bloody Grundy should hang his head in shame…Marshall and Hayes were taking marks everywhere and flogged Grundy around the ground. Grundy took 2 marks and had pretty much no influence. Meanwhile in his first game Hayes had 10 marks, 3 goals, 18 pos and was pretty much beat on ground.
Why do people still not get this?! It's just so unrealistic to think we might put someone on the list with the thought they could discard them after only six months. Almost certainly people will be arguing for us to take every pick that's available at next year's mid-season draft, because "it's a free hit"! We're going to want to have a few picks available by the time this year's drafts come around, and filling up list spots with players we're not convinced about doesn't make sense!They weren't going to give someone 6 months, because what's the point. So adding another pick would have cost a pick or recruit at the end of the year. It's why most clubs either passed a pick or didn't bother to open up a second pick even though they could have.
Don't MSD players go on the rookie list?, if so, then you could take someone for 6 months and then delist them if they are no good, they won't take up a senior list spotWhy do people still not get this?! It's just so unrealistic to think we might put someone on the list with the thought they could discard them after only six months. Almost certainly people will be arguing for us to take every pick that's available at next year's mid-season draft, because "it's a free hit"! We're going to want to have a few picks available by the time this year's drafts come around, and filling up list spots with players we're not convinced about doesn't make sense!
We don't even have an available rookie spot as it stands, so he goes on the senior list.Don't MSD players go on the rookie list?, if so, then you could take someone for 6 months and then delist them if they are no good, they won't take up a senior list spot
Yes, they do go on the rookie list, since it is a rookie draft. Do you really think it reasonable that we e.g. bring in a player from WA and have a look at him for just 6 months, where he might get to play a modest amount of games, then send him packing at the end of the year because we didn't think he was good enough? I'm quite sure we wouldn't be interested in taking on players for half a season, with the view that we could dump them at the end of it, as it's just not the right way to go about things. At the end of the year we need to get back to a maximum of 6 Cat. A Rookies (after the drafts). We'll have Begg, Carmichael, Dean, Ginnivan and Johnson there for sure. Chugg is one who many would have expected to be delisted at the end of the year, but maybe he can surprise and stay on. So list spots will be very tight, with the rookie list more than full now (with 7 Cat. A's). and adding another player mid-season would have made things even trickier. Noble will need to be elevated, and they'll probably need to find a spot for Wilson somewhere as well.Don't MSD players go on the rookie list?, if so, then you could take someone for 6 months and then delist them if they are no good, they won't take up a senior list spot
I'm quite intrigued, how Carmichael is put on the rookie list when we have no rookie spots. This spot was opened up by the LT1 in Krueger or/and Roughty retirement. Both were on the senior list.Yes, they do go on the rookie list, since it is a rookie draft. Do you really think it reasonable that we e.g. bring in a player from WA and have a look at him for just 6 months, where he might get to play a modest amount of games, then send him packing at the end of the year because we didn't think he was good enough? I'm quite sure we wouldn't be interested in taking on players for half a season, with the view that we could dump them at the end of it, as it's just not the right way to go about things. At the end of the year we need to get back to a maximum of 6 Cat. A Rookies (after the drafts). We'll have Begg, Carmichael, Dean, Ginnivan and Johnson there for sure. Chugg is one who many would have expected to be delisted at the end of the year, but maybe he can surprise and stay on. So list spots will be very tight, with the rookie list more than full now (with 7 Cat. A's). and adding another player mid-season would have made things even trickier. Noble will need to be elevated, and they'll probably need to find a spot for Wilson somewhere as well.
No, I don't think it's reasonable to bring in a player for 6 months and then delist them but it is a buisness after all and Sometimes you have to make the big moves to get recognisedYes, they do go on the rookie list, since it is a rookie draft. Do you really think it reasonable that we e.g. bring in a player from WA and have a look at him for just 6 months, where he might get to play a modest amount of games, then send him packing at the end of the year because we didn't think he was good enough? I'm quite sure we wouldn't be interested in taking on players for half a season, with the view that we could dump them at the end of it, as it's just not the right way to go about things. At the end of the year we need to get back to a maximum of 6 Cat. A Rookies (after the drafts). We'll have Begg, Carmichael, Dean, Ginnivan and Johnson there for sure. Chugg is one who many would have expected to be delisted at the end of the year, but maybe he can surprise and stay on. So list spots will be very tight, with the rookie list more than full now (with 7 Cat. A's). and adding another player mid-season would have made things even trickier. Noble will need to be elevated, and they'll probably need to find a spot for Wilson somewhere as well.
I don't think you need to add them to any list until the end of the season unless they nominate 18 months, you just need to be a player down for the rest of the season to be able to have a pickI'm quite intrigued, how Carmichael is put on the rookie list when we have no rookie spots. This spot was opened up by the LT1 in Krueger or/and Roughty retirement. Both were on the senior list.
By the way Dekka talked, Josh either nominated 18 months or we have offered it to him.I don't think you need to add them to any list until the end of the season unless they nominate 18 months, you just need to be a player down for the rest of the season to be able to have a pick
Carlton did this exact thing with Josh DeLuca. He was a bit stiff. I think even moved from WA too back in 2019No, I don't think it's reasonable to bring in a player for 6 months and then delist them but it is a buisness after all and Sometimes you have to make the big moves to get recognised
Clubs are allowed to go over the limit (of 6 Cat. A Rookies) temporarily as they've lost players (from the Primary list or Cat. A) through injury or retirement, but need to get "their books in order" by the end of the year, and have no more than the 6 Cat. A's. Josh Carmichael will certainly be a Cat. A Rookie when the season ends, and we can leave him on that list for a few years if we so desire.I'm quite intrigued, how Carmichael is put on the rookie list when we have no rookie spots. This spot was opened up by the LT1 in Krueger or/and Roughty retirement. Both were on the senior list.
We're not agreeing on this one mate, but that's okay! Business or not, I couldn't be that ruthless, and I'm glad that our club seems to think the same way!No, I don't think it's reasonable to bring in a player for 6 months and then delist them but it is a buisness after all and Sometimes you have to make the big moves to get recognised
Noone is going to do less in the half a season after the rookie draft than Begg and Johnson did. Would you have cut them at the end of last year? Draper and Harrison have had a preseason and half a season - would you be making a call on them now if it was allowed?Don't MSD players go on the rookie list?, if so, then you could take someone for 6 months and then delist them if they are no good, they won't take up a senior list spot
I know all that, but the MSD was only ever implemented to give teams top up players if they lose a player for the year. In it's purest form, you could easily cut a player after 6 months. I wouldn't do it but the option is thereNoone is going to do less in the half a season after the rookie draft than Begg and Johnson did. Would you have cut them at the end of last year? Draper and Harrison have had a preseason and half a season - would you be making a call on them now if it was allowed?
Its going to have to be a pretty terrible selection for him to be cut after 11 rounds of footy. Because you're generally not going to know if they're going to make it or not.
I'd only do it for 6 month depth with someone like Jetta or Hartley.
Ahh, okay now that makes sense. Likely to replace Noble on the Cat A list then.Clubs are allowed to go over the limit (of 6 Cat. A Rookies) temporarily as they've lost players (from the Primary list or Cat. A) through injury or retirement, but need to get "their books in order" by the end of the year, and have no more than the 6 Cat. A's. Josh Carmichael will certainly be a Cat. A Rookie when the season ends, and we can leave him on that list for a few years if we so desire.
Carlton did this exact thing with Josh DeLuca. He was a bit stiff. I think even moved from WA too back in 2019
Yeah, it was a real shock at the time.He was the No.1 pick in the mid-season draft. Now he doesn’t even have a club for 2020
He was the No.1 pick in the mid-season draft. Now he doesn’t even have a clubwww.foxsports.com.au
I just don't see how it's a big move, I just can't see upside or the mentality that would enable it to work. What mentality would you go in with, bearing in mind that you're unlikely to have anything close to an answer on whether he's going to make it. Is the mentality that we're going to delist him at the end of the year unless he shows us something special? Say we took El Nour, what are we really going to find out in the last 10 games of the VFL season, other than him being a skinny kid with a bit of potential who can play alright in the VFL, but isn't AFL ready yet.No, I don't think it's reasonable to bring in a player for 6 months and then delist them but it is a buisness after all and Sometimes you have to make the big moves to get recognised
Once again, why the Hayes comparison to Grundy? He was playing as a forward and pinch hitter in the ruck. Grundy was not his opponent. He destroyed Madgen, and fair play for that, but stop trying to make out that his good game had anything to do with Grundy, who thoroughly won the ruck battle, but lost the battle around the ground to Marshall.Marshall and Hayes were taking marks everywhere and flogged Grundy around the ground. Grundy took 2 marks and had pretty much no influence. Meanwhile in his first game Hayes had 10 marks, 3 goals, 18 pos and was pretty much beat on ground.
That’s a dumbshit statement if ever I saw one. There’s a hell of a difference between selecting a SSP rookie, who’s trained all preseason with your club and you’ve been able to see development and an ability to cope with AFL level opponents, and a late mid season draft pick in the shallowest draft of the year. Just stop, I feel like I’m getting dumber every time I read these arguments.I remember a story saying we looked at Hayes, prob gave him the Apex36 recruitment strategy, don’t bother giving him a shot, better off selecting no one.